The Deadly Consequences of Shared Responsibility

As negligence lawyers, we spend a lot of time looking at tragedies in hindsight.
To win a case, we have to prove that a catastrophic accident could have
been, and should have been, prevented through the use of reasonable precautions.
We thus spend a lot of time investigating accidents to reveal what the
defendant should have done differently.

Two recent tragedies in the news have reminded me of
the deadly consequences of shared responsibility.

“Shared responsibility” sounds like a sensible idea - two sets
of eyes are better than one, right? And even more eyes is even better,
right? The ironic truth, however, is that people often become less safety
conscious, and thus more irresponsible and reckless, when they believe
others are looking out for them.

In the Netherlands, for example, many cities and towns have experimented
with an idea that sounds crazy at first:
removing all of the lights and signs at intersections. Road designers in Europe have found - and many road safety experts in
the United States believe - that these safety features cause people to
stop thinking about the circumstances around them. Instead of promoting
safety, the traffic signals cause people to turn off their brains and
blindly follow the signs. Removing the signs, then, forces drivers and
pedestrians to be on guard about their own safety and safety of others,
resulting in a reduction in overall crashes.

Which brings me back the two tragedies. An article in
this month’s
Outside magazine describes in detail how a group of expert skiers somehow found themselves
voluntarily skiing in an avalanche-prone area right after new snowfall,
causing an avalanche that left three of them dead. When each of the skiers
went out, they mistakenly depended on each other to be vigilant about
their own safety; in the end, none of them really thought through the
situation. As the article explains:

ALL OF THE WARNING signs had been there, glaring and obvious: heaps of
new snow, terrain that would funnel a slide into a gully, a large and
confident group with a herd mentality, and a forecast that warned of dangerous
avalanche conditions. All of us had been trained to recognize these risk
factors, yet we did not heed them. Why?

"In a group, you feel less accountable for making decisions,"
Peikert said later. "Because it's one or two people making the
call. It's like a riot-if one person throws a rock, everyone starts
throwing rocks."

There is a sea change occurring in avalanche education. A decade ago, courses
focused on digging snow pits and analyzing weak layers. But then, says
Lel Tone, an avalanche-safety instructor, "we realized we were giving
people a false sense of confidence. Looking at the statistics, there was
a period of time when people who had taken an Avy 1 course were the ones
being caught in avalanches."

In the other tragedy, last weekend
the residents of Midland, Texas were shocked by an unbelievable accident in which a tractor-trailer carrying Iraqi and Afghanistan war heroes in
a parade was struck by a train. The NTSB has already concluded that, at
the time of the accident, the train crossing’s signals were working
properly, and that they had given off their warnings well in advance of
the actual accident. Despite the train crossing warnings, the driver of
the truck not only drove onto the tracks, but did so without adequate
room in front of him to drive all the way through, a blatant violation
of safe truck driving practices.

How on earth could that happen? How could a licensed, qualified commercial
driver foolishly ignore railroad crossing signals and enter the tracks
without adequate room to pull forward? I think that, in time, the NTSB
investigation will reveal that the problem was, ironically, the police
escort. I don’t mean that the officers did something wrong - but
my hunch is that the truck driver, in the middle of a parade with several
police escorts, figured that the police officers were looking out for
traffic hazards in general, and so let his guard down and blindly followed
the parade float ahead of him.

These two tragedies are thus a reminder to us all to beware the dangers
of shared responsibility.
If you’re not 100% sure who is looking out for safety, then it’s
up to you and you alone.

Office Location

Contact Us

The information on this website is for general information purposes only.
Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice for any individual
case or situation. This information is not intended to create, and receipt
or viewing does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Please
note: All cases are different and past results do not predict future case outcomes.

x

⚠

Your browser is out of date. To get the full experience of this website,
please update to most recent version.